Quote:
Originally Posted by cordoba
Did 3D porn really fail?
Your content didn't sell but maybe that was due to an overcrowded content market relative to the demand, the demand largely being determined by the limited number of 3D TVs in use.
3D TVs and 3D entertainment in general failed, but 3D porn wasn't a complete failure at all. Last I checked Penthouse 3D had made millions of dollars in sales and are still shooting in 3D. 3D TVs were bought mainly by families for the lounge. Dads dont want to fap off to porn wearing glasses in the family lounge. Yet anaglyph porn wearing those crappy glasses for laptops was highly popular, especially given how crude anaglyph is compared to 3D TV.
If 3D TVs and 3D broadcasting had really taken off, 3D porn would have as well. 3D porn wasn't quite good enough to drive technology adoption, and this time it was tech that determined the fate of porn, not the other way around (as it's commonly supposed to be).
However, I agree that vr is on a whole different level. I'm surprised Penthouse didn't embrace vr, given that all their existing 3D stock is viewable with vr headsets and they have that experience of producing in stereo 3D already.
|
well - who else besides Penthouse is doing 3D? Did they really make millions on it? Is anyone using his 3D TV at home? I have tried mine once about 4 years ago and everybody I ask says the same - no one is watching 3D at home. Even when they live alone.
And for me the HUGE difference is: With VR I have clients that are willing to invest in production - with 3D the willingness to spend extra on production was zero. Besides Penthouse - I could tell you some really funny (or sad) story about that.
So we didn't even start 3D production back then because no one wanted to pay extra for it.
And I agree about 360° - makes sense only for mass scenes.